Thoughts on Obama's speech to school kids and education in general
The hub bub has died down about Obama's speech to school children. Some of the remarks made by parents were astounding--one said that he didn't raise his child to be a community organizer--another stated that she didn't want her child to be indoctrinated by Obama's socialist agenda. In my town, the speech was going to be presented at recess because so many parents raised a fuss about their children watching it.
So as a former social studies teacher and parent, I want to add my two cents into the mix. In my 32 years in the classroom, one major theme and objective was to expose students to many points of view. Most of our resources and textbooks tried to present both sides of most every issue. We even had a series of books entitled "Opposing Viewpoints." So, what is the problem with allowing students to hear a short speech from the president which may or may not agree with your beliefs? I would hope that as a parents, people would have enough confidence in their children to allow them to hear something that is not the "party line" and that the children be able to draw their own conclusions. Nobody said that the children had to agree with everything the president said. Isn't that the purpose of education? How can people consider themselves enlightened if they read and/or hear only one side of the story?
Now, as a parent, my belief was that I was raising a child to become an independent person--one who would be capable of making good choices and decisions on his own. The older he was, the more choices he had to make. I did not see my role as a parent to be one of producing a clone or robot--who would parrot everything I programmed him to say. One other point I would like to make is that if parents try to instill a system of values in their children, one short speech by the president, no matter how persuasive a speaker he may be, should not shake those core values. In other words, I find it hard to believe that Obama could convince a child of conservative parents to adopt his "agenda" after a 10 minute speech. The President may be a good speaker, but he isn't the Pied Piper of Hamlin. And what is wrong with hearing the President's agenda? He was elected by a majority of the voters. Isn't it good to know what the "other side" is trying to do?
In the end, the speech contained little or nothing controversial. It's too bad that so many children missed an opportunity to hear the President address them directly.
So as a former social studies teacher and parent, I want to add my two cents into the mix. In my 32 years in the classroom, one major theme and objective was to expose students to many points of view. Most of our resources and textbooks tried to present both sides of most every issue. We even had a series of books entitled "Opposing Viewpoints." So, what is the problem with allowing students to hear a short speech from the president which may or may not agree with your beliefs? I would hope that as a parents, people would have enough confidence in their children to allow them to hear something that is not the "party line" and that the children be able to draw their own conclusions. Nobody said that the children had to agree with everything the president said. Isn't that the purpose of education? How can people consider themselves enlightened if they read and/or hear only one side of the story?
Now, as a parent, my belief was that I was raising a child to become an independent person--one who would be capable of making good choices and decisions on his own. The older he was, the more choices he had to make. I did not see my role as a parent to be one of producing a clone or robot--who would parrot everything I programmed him to say. One other point I would like to make is that if parents try to instill a system of values in their children, one short speech by the president, no matter how persuasive a speaker he may be, should not shake those core values. In other words, I find it hard to believe that Obama could convince a child of conservative parents to adopt his "agenda" after a 10 minute speech. The President may be a good speaker, but he isn't the Pied Piper of Hamlin. And what is wrong with hearing the President's agenda? He was elected by a majority of the voters. Isn't it good to know what the "other side" is trying to do?
In the end, the speech contained little or nothing controversial. It's too bad that so many children missed an opportunity to hear the President address them directly.
posted by eeroots at 8:34 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home